The right to speedy investigation and trial, as recognized under Article 21 of the Constitution, should be upheld, and the delay in investigation should not be attributable to the accused.

JUDGMENT

Jasmeet Singh, J. These are writ petitions which are being disposed of by a common order.

2. The petitioner in the above writ petitions has sought quashing of the following FIRs:

a. FIR No. 01/2012 dated 10.01.2012 registered at PS Anti Corruption Branch under Section 13(1)(d)/13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter "PC Act") and Section 420/120B Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter "IPC") and proceedings emanating therefrom in W.P.(CRL) 786/2021;

b. FIR No. 02/2012 dated 10.01.2012 registered at PS Anti Corruption Branch under Section 13(1)(d)/13(2) of the PC Act and Section 420/468/471/120B IPC and proceedings emanating therefrom in W.P.(CRL) 781/2021;

c. FIR No. 04/2013 dated 16.02.2013 registered at PS Anti Corruption Branch under Section 13(1)(d)/13(2) of the PC Act and Section 420/468/471/120B IPC and proceedings emanating therefrom in W.P.(CRL) 785/2021.

3. The factual matrix of the case as per the petitioner is as under:

a. The Petitioner had a career of around 36 years as a medical officer under the Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh, the Assam Rifles, and finally the Central Govt. Health Services.

b. The petitioner was transferred to Delhi Government and was posted as Director, Health Services ("DHS") on 26.08.2009. Subsequently, he was posted as Medical Superintendent, Deen Dayal Upadhyay (DDU) Hospital on 10.03.2011 and was to retire on 31.01.2012 on attaining superannuation.

c. The petitioner was suspended from service on 02.11.2011, just 3 months prior to his date of retirement. Being aggrieved by the suspension, the petitioner filed an Original Application No. 4087/2011 before the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Principal Bench, New Delhi. Vide order dated 23.12.2011, the learned CAT was pleased to quash and set aside the suspension orders dated 02.11.2011 and 28.11.2011.

d. Since the order dated 23.12.2011 was not implemented and the retirement dated of the petitioner was approaching on 31.01.2012, the petitioner filed a Contempt Petition No. 06/2012 titled `Dr. Sarbesh Bhattacharjee v. Sh. Anshu Prakash & Ors.' before the learned CAT.

e. Thereafter, the FIR No. 01/2012 and impugned FIR No. 02/2012 were filed against the petitioner on the same date i.e., 10.01.2012.

f. Following are the FIRs registered against the petitioner:

g. All the above-mentioned FIRs emanate from the same tender inquiry No. 2/DHS/CPA/2009 relating to the procurement of different medical equipment.

h. As far as the order dated 23.12.2011 of CAT is concerned, the same was challenged by the Department of Family Health and Welfare preferred W.P.(C.) No. 249/2012 titled `Department of Health and Family Welfare v. Dr. Sarbesh Bhattacharjee & Ors.' and the operation of the order dated 23.12.2011 was stayed.

i. Hence, on 06.02.2012, the learned CAT was pleased to close the contempt matter with liberty to the petitioner to revive the Contempt Petition if the occasion so arose.

j. Thereafter, the petitioner has been repeatedly called for investigation and he has been cooperating with the investigating agencies.

k. The petitioner has been granted bail in the FIR No. 01/2012 on 01.06.2012. The petitioner was granted interim protection in the FIR No. 02/2012 on 04.01.2013 and thereafter anticipatory bail on 23.01.2013. On 17.07.2013, the order of 23.01.2013 was made absolute. On 20.05.2013, the petitioner was granted interim protection was in FIR No. 04/2013. He was further granted anticipatory bail vide ord